June 26, 2008

Faces close to group prototypes are attractive

Psychon Bull Rev. 2008 Jun;15(3):615-22.

Locating attractiveness in the face space: faces are more attractive when closer to their group prototype.

Potter T, Corneille O.

Face attractiveness relates positively to the mathematical averageness of a face, but how close attractive faces of varying groups are to their own and to other-group prototypes in the face space remains unclear. In two studies, we modeled the locations of attractive and unattractive Caucasian, Asian, and African faces in participants' face space using multidimensional scaling analysis. In all three sets of faces, facial attractiveness significantly increased with the absolute proximity of a face to its group prototype. In the case of Caucasian and African faces (Study 1), facial attractiveness also tended to increase with the absolute proximity of a face to the other-group prototype. However, this association was at best marginal, and it became clearly nonsignificant when distance to the own-group prototype was controlled for. Thus, the present research provides original evidence that average features of faces contribute to increasing their attractiveness, but only when these features are average to the group to which a face belongs. The present research also offers further support to face space models of people's mental representations of faces.

Denzel washington isn´t prototype of nothing(maybe like actor). He will not "pass" for a Negro anywhere in África. In the West or South, will be Mulato. In the East, "Arab" or Ethiopian. In the North, "Abd" a descendant of slaves, wich is only half true...

I disagree, I have met West Africans who could look like Denzel, they mostly live North of Nigeria...yes they might have Berber or Arab admixture, but still...there are Africans that look like him, but that was not my point anyway.

He, too me, looks like a black guy from the Americas...(not just the U.S. but the Carribean as well).

So when I speak of average face, i was really speaking of that population not average face of a place on the African continent.

My argument has nothing to do with average black man from Sudan, Nigeria, or Congo and average white guy from France, Denmark, or Russia.

What I was saying is that two men from different populations who are racially different can have different appearances, nose width, nose height, forehead height, lip size, etc. and still be symmetrical.

Facial symmetry has nothing to do with race, it has to do with the distance between features and if both sides are balanced.

This is the point.

Also, just be clear, in the "West" Denzel is not considered a Mulatto, not even in Latin America...well maybe in the Dominican Republic, but that is about it...in Mexico, Brazil, etc he is a "negro".

These are Igbo in Nigeria. The look stereotypically African America, usually I can tell "Africans" on the street by their facial features (not just clothes or behaviors) but these women would not stand out if they dressed Western.

Dragon Horse, I agree with you entirely in the question of simmetry. I only think that D.W. was not a good exemple. I born in África(Angola). Until my ten years, all my friends were Negros. After, I met guys from other parts of África. All that look like D.W. belonged to mixed etnic groups from Cabo Verde, S.Tomé, Sudan, Suhailis, Fulanis, etç...And I was only speaking about "west" Africa, not American Continent. It´s why I use the word Negro and not Black. Don´t means the same. Like "Branco" (white) in Brasil is diferent of white in Europe. Yes, I´me white (Portuguese) and I can be wrong. But, I remember that when the Independence came (Angola, 1975), the negros(Ovimbundus) in my region killed everibody that looks like D.W.. By other words, they killed everibody that looks mixed...

I don't say they are not but the woman in the background is more stereotypically Negroid, while the drag queen in the foreground (these "women" are men in drag, IMO) could perfectly pass as white in most of the Mediterranean (ok, a little darky but my cousin is much darker - and his/her facial features are more Whitoid than Negroid, more than Washington's).

I've seen Cameroonian Fang women who lighter skin but their facial structure was much more typically Tropical African.

One important question that seems to arise is what the heck is the average racial face? Certainly the perception of average Caucasoid may not be the same in Northern, Eastern or Southern Europe, not to mention West Asia. For me for instance, partial epicanthic fold, straight (or kinky) hair, brachicephally, prognathism or small nose look rather non-Caucasoid. But for others the central features may be light hair, skin and eyes... or whatever. Calculating a realistic average seems really tricky.

I understand you now, and I don't disagree. Western blacks tend to have a certain "look" i would say they are still mostly West African in features (the majority of people) but they are definately a subgroup...

I can understand that someone like D.W. would appear mixed in a place like Sudan, where there are people who are "Arabs" who look like him and they consider black Africans to be Dinka looking people.

Maju:

I agree with your second paragraph.

Average Caucasian might not be attractive to all or even most Caucasians. I don't think most African Americans would find the average black (including all blacks in the West and Africa) attractive.

From my point of view, once and a while I see Southern Sudanese refugees, Niholitic and I feel they are a different race, their appearance is striking to me and I don't feel like they are my "people".

Then again there are a lot of Anglo-Saxons in America in rural areas who don't feel North Indians or most Arabs from the Gulf (the darker ones) are "white" either...although phenotypically they are Caucasian.

Even Barack Obama's father...I feel should be consider a different race.

"I also feel though that people South of Vietnam in Asia...like Cambodians, Malay groups, etc should be a different race.

They obviously would stand out on the streets of Korea, Japan, and China...and it would be obvious to everyone they are foreigners there is little to no overlap.

Its like taking the average North Indian to Finland."

Blah! What subjective crap!

Malays look no different from tanned Chinese. Some Cambodians do have an odd appearance, but most of them look like tanned Japanese people. Just because none of these people look like typical Koreans does not mean that they would be too conspicuous in China or Japan.

"Malays look no different from tanned Chinese". There would be few people in the world apart from Ebizur who could not tell the difference between a tanned Northeast Asian and a pale SE Asian. I agree that some Japanese and Koreans look a little like SE Asians but this may indicate ancient coastal contact.

Most people would also have little trouble distinguishing between people from West Africa and those from Northeast Africa. As Dragon Horse said, "once and a while I see Southern Sudanese refugees, Niholitic and I feel they are a different race". People from South Africa who have little admixture from the Bantu migration look different again.

And I have no time for people who cannot distinguish between Africans and Melanesians. Both groups have dark skin but that's about as far as it goes. Admittedly if you look hard enough you may be able to find individuals who could be difficult to classify.

Like all species the regional varieties at the geographical edges or points of the distribution look the most different.

My problem is with this stupid "NE Asian" vs. "SE Asian" crap. There is no commonality among these so-called "NE Asians" that distinguishes them as a group from these so-called "SE Asians" besides the regular color of their skin, with the SE Asians being naturally darker.

I've met some Chinese who look stereotypically Cambodian, Vietnamese who look stereotypically Korean, Thais who look stereotypically Japanese, and so forth, but there is no "Chinese-Korean-Japanese, etc." look to contrast with a "Cambodian, Vietnamese, Malay, etc." look besides the usual cline in skin color from darker at lower latitudes to lighter at higher latitudes.

Your comparison with West Africans, NE Africans, and Khoisan is totally misguided. NE Africans are more closely related to Southwest Asian and European Caucasoids than they are to other Africans, and this is obvious from their genetics and phenotypes; Khoisan derive much of their heritage from a very ancient branch of humanity that has contributed only as a minor substratal element to some other African populations. On the other hand, Chinese, Vietnamese, Koreans, Thais, Japanese, etc. all share a great deal of evolutionarily fairly recent ancestry, and a sharp distinction like that which is possible to make between NE Africans and West Africans is just not possible in the case of these Asian populations, except for perhaps some Koreans who look too extremely "Tungid." The differences among Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Thais, etc. are mostly only notable on an individual basis, and perhaps to the degree that one could say "so-and-so looks very typically Vietnamese," but without excluding the possibility that this very "Vietnamese-looking" person is actually, say, Chinese.

I would only consider the possibility of delimiting a separate "SE Asian race" in the case of some populations of the Malay Archipelago, like Aetas and Timorese, whose phenotypes largely do not overlap with those of eastern Asian ethnicities.

I agree that northeast Africans demonstrate admixture with Caucasians. This is precisely why they look different from west Africans. I'm interested to note you accept a fundamental difference between Khoisan and other Africans. Research suggests that the movement out of Africa was the product of mixing of two strains so your idea fits that.

"There is no commonality among these so-called 'NE Asians' that distinguishes them as a group from these so-called 'SE Asians' besides the regular color of their skin, with the SE Asians being naturally darker". What about their different-looking eyes, SE Asians' slightly wavy hair, I'm sure I'll think of some more. And geneticists claim northern and southern Chinese are easily distinguished genetically. The extreme NE Asia phenotype seems to occur especially on the plateau country rather than along the coast. Clouding the issue of course is that people from NE Asia have been moving south into SE Asia and mixing with the locals for several thousand years. This is the reason why "a sharp distinction like that which is possible to make between NE Africans and West Africans" has tended to become obscured.

I'm not going to waste time either...it is obvious you and I are correct on this.

As far as Cambodians or Thai...it is also obvious that when looking at pictures you have to know what you are looking at. Thailand's population is almost 20% ethnic Han Chinese and who knows how many Chinese have mixed with the local Thais (historically a lot, one of the Thai kings, I believe 100 years ago) was Chinese on his mother's side, the former Prime Minister, Thaskin was also part Chinese on his father's side. Vietnam is the same.

Actually I consider most Vietnamese to look East Asian also though once you go into the Southern Mekong Delta regions, you start getting people who look really different, but this is because those people were a Malay people who were conquered by the Dai Viet people who moved south, but one still must be careful because in places like Saigon, there have long been prominent Chinese trading families, although most left as boat people, there are still some, and many have intermarried with Vietnamese.

I've lived in Shanghai, China for 6 months, been to South Korea, been to Taiwan, and lived in Tokyo, Japan for over a year.

Filipinas in Tokyo as well as Thai stand out. A lot of Chinese people stand out (but much less so). Indonesians also stand out.

Koreans tend to blend much better, but some of them stand out as well, just by looks, much less so though.

In China, North Chinese tend to group more with Koreans and Japanese in appearance, but the big difference is I think Koreans have bigger heads, and Japanese are shorter than Northern Chinese and Koreans on average. Beijing people are also (on average) much taller and wider than Shanghai people...

Southern Chinese do have a different appearance from Northern Chinese on average, but there is overlap. The reason is Southern Chinese are a result of absorption of people who are related to Thai and Malay like peoples. Northern Chinese absorbed many Mongol and Turkic type people (as well as Manchus and related Tungustic groups).

This is well documented and no educated Chinese person would argue with it.

Look at this site...there is plenty of information, it is ran by a Taiwanese man.

http://www.chinahistoryforum.com

This is why in China, my wife is assumed to be Chinese, although she is Japanese, because there are some Northern Chinese who look like her, but in Japan most Chinese stand out as distinct. The variation in Japan is far less.

As far as Southeast Asians...there are some Chinese (mostly from Guangdong and Fujian) who do look like tan Thai or Cambodian people, but that is because those Thai and Cambodians often have Chinese ancestry or ARE ETHNIC CHINESE. Also Southern Chinese group genetically with Southeast Asians, because they are a mix of the original Han Chinese and Southeast Asian groups who lived in southern China.

China is the place in Asia with the greatest cline in phenotype of this reason.

There is a lot of information on this:

To be it as shortly and politely as possible you don't know what you are talking about and need to read more on the subject before making strong comments.

Start Here:

http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showforum=90

That's all I have to say about that...you can take a horse to water but...

"I've lived in Shanghai, China for 6 months, been to South Korea, been to Taiwan, and lived in Tokyo, Japan for over a year."

So, what? I have observed all these people and places, too, and I think you are confused by skin color and prejudice.

And your links are unnecessary and uncalled for; I am already a member of the China History Forum.

By the way, are you proficient in any Asian language? I don't trust the opinion of anyone who doesn't know the language of the ethnicities in question. Well, then again, I thought your opinion was shitty from the beginning; I would just consider you slightly less of a retard if you could prove your knowledge of various Asian languages to me.

By the way, your "Burmese" photo includes many individuals who are obviously Indian or mixed with Indians; they do not represent the typical Burmese phenotype, nor are such individuals found in significant numbers in other parts of Southeast Asia.

Your examples of Indonesians and Cambodians, despite the fact that your "Lombok" photo (Sasak, perhaps?) does not represent a typical Indonesian phenotype in my opinion, as well as the Burmese in that photo who do not look like subcontinental Indians, appear no different from dark-skinned versions of certain individuals from China, Japan, Korea, etc.

Please use your all-illuminating wisdom to indicate for everyone which of these Cambodians and Thais could not pass for Chinese or Japanese if they were not so swarthy:

(Watch out, there might be some Chinese, Japanese, or Vietnamese people mixed in there! But our omniscient Dragon Horse would surely recognize immediately which of these photos are actually of Chinese people, right?)

Old Blog Archive

Dienekes' Anthropology blog is dedicated to human population genetics, physical anthropology, archaeology, and history.

You are free to reuse any of the materials of this blog for non-commercial purposes, as long as you attribute them to Dienekes Pontikos and provide a link to either the individual blog entry or to Dienekes Anthropology Blog.

Feel free to send e-mail to Dienekes Pontikos, or follow @dienekesp on Twitter.